Comparison of Retention Rates of Fissure Sealants Using Two Flowable Restorative Materials and a Conventional Resin Sealant: Two-year Follow-up
Overview
Medical Education
Affiliations
Objective: The purpose of this clinical study was to compare the retention rates of two flowable restorative systems (Admira Flow and Grandio Flow) with that of a conventional resin-based sealant (Fissurit F).
Materials And Methods: The study was planned as a clinical trial with a split-mouth design. A total of 122 sealants (38 Admira Flow, 41 Grandio Flow, 43 Fissurit F) were randomly applied to completely erupted permanent molars in 35 patients aged 9-20 years and followed up for 24 months. Data were analyzed using Pearson's χ(2) and multiple comparison tests.
Results: At the end of the follow-up period, Fissurit F had higher retention rates (81.0%) than both Admira Flow (60.5%) and Grandio Flow (57.1%), with p < 0.05. However, there was no significant difference in caries development among groups (p > 0.05).
Conclusion: The two flowable composite resin materials used as fissure sealant were less retentive than the conventional resin sealant.
Kamath V, Hebbal M, Ankola A, Sankeshwari R, Jalihal S, Choudhury A J Clin Med. 2022; 11(12).
PMID: 35743349 PMC: 9224720. DOI: 10.3390/jcm11123276.
Ramesh H, Ashok R, Rajan M, Balaji L, Ganesh A Heliyon. 2020; 6(9):e04964.
PMID: 33005790 PMC: 7519376. DOI: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2020.e04964.
Flowable composite as fissure sealing material? A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Bagherian A, Sarraf Shirazi A Br Dent J. 2018; 224(2):92-97.
PMID: 29372708 DOI: 10.1038/sj.bdj.2018.40.
Impact of the intermediary layer on sealant retention: a randomized 24-month clinical trial.
Moreira K, Kantovitz K, Aguiar J, Borges A, Pascon F, Puppin-Rontani R Clin Oral Investig. 2016; 21(5):1435-1443.
PMID: 27392611 DOI: 10.1007/s00784-016-1890-4.